The Republicans have changed American politics since they took control of the House of Representatives. They have put spending restraint and debt reduction at the top of the national agenda. They have sparked a discussion on entitlement reform. They have turned a bill to raise the debt limit into an opportunity to put the U.S. on a stable fiscal course.

Republican leaders have also proved to be effective negotiators. They have been tough and inflexible and forced the Democrats to come to them. The Democrats have agreed to tie budget cuts to the debt ceiling bill. They have agreed not to raise tax rates. They have agreed to a roughly 3-to-1 rate of spending cuts to revenue increases, an astonishing concession.

If the debt ceiling talks fail, independents voters will see that Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans were not. If responsible Republicans dont take control, independents will conclude that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern.

Not fit to govern? David Brooks seems to forget that for the FIRST TIME in history, the Democrats have failed to offer a budget for two years in a row.

Brooks seems to think that ‘compromise’ is the beginning and ending of this discussion.

I’m getting more and more of a sense from folks I know who aren’t as into politics as I am that this isn’t true. To many more people than Brooks knows, stopping this madness is the real key to showing which party is fit to lead.

4
posted on 07/05/2011 5:15:18 AM PDT
by Darkwolf377
(``Stupidity is also a gift of God, but one mustn't misuse it``-Pope John Paul II)

through codification the republicans (99.9%) have abdicated their position as lawmakers and become willing "useful idiots" to the machinations of the democratic party (albeit) socialists.

To tell a dark failing of mine, having voted for Carter in my first election (and regretting it to this day) with the exception of Regan and to some extent Bush V.2, the crappy politicians that we have saddled ourselves with and the wonderfully stupid carbon units that keep re-electing crooks and perverts to Washington we get what we deserve, so how about we all get together and force DC to stop spending what they don't have, through (for the time being) non-violent actions.

So it’s the obvious, “no brainer” compromise, when spending goes from 19% of the budget to 38% in a few years, to RAISE TAXES as well as to cut spending? Not just to take the darn spending back to where it was??

So the trade is a few hundred million in ‘revenue increases’ in exchange for lowering the future debt by 3 to 4 trillion?

If so, it seems to me that the DEMS should forgo the symbolic ‘revenue increases’ and PROVE TO THE WORLD that they are the responsible party and are willing to make the hard choices.

Of course all this is fake. Bush-41 was promised loads of spending cuts, also, in exchange for the tax increases that cost him his job. Did those cuts come? They did, 4 years later, but only after the Republicans owned Congress.

These Republicans don’t seem to be that stupid, but with this piece by David Brooks, they may not be able to hold out much more (who wants to be attacked in the NYTs).

David Brooks is the contemporary Whittaker Chambers. He is anti-Leftist but not anti-Left. He believes in his soul the moral and secular supremacy of socialist dogma as he “fights” it's promulgation. Both Chambers and Brooks would say: “I love communism—it's those damn communists I can't stand.” So he lectures Republicans on how to win and be better Leftists than the losers.

Kristol acceptance speech: "Thank you very much. But I could not have done it without the help of all the neos--David Frum, Michael Gerson, David Brooks, Richard Perle.....and my Dearest Departed Daddy."

"Sniffle---my Dearest Daddy (who was Giuliani's foreign policy advisor) wrote: "The historical task and political purpose of neoconservatism is.....to convert theRepublican Party and American conservatism in general, against their respective wills, into a new kind of conservative politics suitable togoverning a modern democracy."

"Sob."

"I especially want to thank punkneo Douglas Feith for faking documents on hishome computer so we punkneos could dupe our lapdog, President Bush."

"Without Doug we would not have been able to transfer trillions of US dollarsinto the Mideast, into the pockets of war profiteers, which enabled Richard Perleto startup an oil business in Iraq with his cut."

Kristol smirked: "Making Iraq safe for Perle's oil business with US tax dollars was truly a noble punkneo effort."

14
posted on 07/05/2011 5:45:51 AM PDT
by Liz
( A taxpayer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Col Sanders.)

David Brooks is the contemporary Whittaker Chambers. He is anti-Leftist but not anti-Left. He believes in his soul the moral and secular supremacy of socialist dogma as he fights it's promulgation.

Um...perhaps you might to brush up a bit more on Whitaker Chambers. I have read his autobiography ("Witness"), biography, and many of his articles and I can assure you he was most definitely anti-left.

THIS JUST IN: there is a reward out for anyone who can determine what David Brooks, Billy Kristol, and the rest of the pukeneos actually do for a living. None of the pukeneos have any visible means of support, unless you count:

(1) media prostitution,

(2) editing stupid magazines subsidized by offshore wire transfers,

(3) infiltratng the US government,

(4) endless think-tank pontificating on how nice it is to goad the US military into invading foreign countries of the pukes choosing,

(5) cheerleading amnesty, National Greatness, America as Empire, endless war, and John McCain,

(6) squatting in the Repub Party, hoping to destroy it from within,

(7) religious cleansing of the Repub Party, and,

(8) kicking so/con Repubs to the curb.

16
posted on 07/05/2011 5:49:46 AM PDT
by Liz
( A taxpayer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for Col Sanders.)

"Making Iraq safe for Perle's oil business with US tax dollars was truly a noble punkneo effort."

When you get your info from sites like StormFront and DUmmieland you end up looking completely foolish which you just did. FACT: Despite the rumors from the usual suspects (StormFront and DUmmieland among others) from about 3 years ago, Perle has NO oil business. Check it out with a bit of research.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.